§ Open mapping theorem
- Given a surjective continuous linear map f:X→Y, image of open unit ball is open.
- Immediate corollary: image of open set is open (translate/scale open unit ball around by linearity) to cover any open set with nbhds.
§ Quick intuition
- Intuition 1: If the map f we bijective, then thm is reasonably believeable given bounded/continuous inverse theorem, since f−1 would be continuous, and thus would map open sets to open sets, which would mean that f does the same.
- In more detail: suppose f−1 exists and is continuous. Then f(U)=Vimplies (f−1)−1(U)=V. Since f−1 is continuous, the iverse image of an open set ( U) is open, and thus V is open.
§ Why surjective
- Consider the embedding f:x↦(x,x) from R to R2.
- The full space R is open in the domain of f, but is not open in R2, since any epsilon ball around any point in the diagonal (x,x) would leak out of the diagonal.
- Thus, not every continuous linear map maps open sets to open sets.
§ Proof
§ Ingenious Lemma about Norms
- Notation: If we have two norms N and M on a space X, we denote BN(x,r) and respectively BMto be the open ball of radius r at point x under norm N.
- We will show that if (a) the identity map (X,N)→(X,M) is continuous, and (b) BM(0,1)⊆BN(0,r)M, that is, the closure of the ball BN(0,r) in the M norm, then BM(0,1)⊆BN(0,(1+μ)r) for any μ>0.
- Inutition: completing under norm M of the open ball on N will continue to trap the ball of Mat the cost of an infinitesimal radius bump.
- Proof:
- From the hypothesis, we see that every point in BM(0,1) is ϵ close to BN(0,r) under completion with respect to M.
- Thus, we get the inclusion that BM(0,1)⊆BN(0,r)+αBM(0,1) for any α>0.
- We solve the equation 1/(1−α)=(1+μ). We can find such a β<1, since μ>0. We pick whatever α we get from this equation to be our α.
- We had the equation BM(0,1)⊆BN(0,r)+αBM(0,1).
- Proof by notation: rewrite as BM(0,1)(1−α)⊆BN(0,r)
- This means that BM(0,1)⊆1/(1−α)BN(0,r), which by definition means that BM(0,1)⊆(1+μ)(BN(0,r). This gives us what we wanted!
- The geometric picture to keep in mind: BM(0,1) can be trapped inside a BN(0,r) followed by a "small" BM(0,1). But by rewriting this "small" BM(0,1) itself as a rescaling of BN(0,r), we can write the full thing as a union of rapidly decreasing balls of the form BN(0,r1),BN(0,r2),….
- All of these will be trapped in BN(0,r1+r2+…).
- In the above argument, where did we use the continuity of I?
§ Lemma implies bounded inverse theorem
- Let T:X→Y be a one-to-one bounded operator. Then the inverse T−1:Y→X is also bounded.
- Define a new norm on Y given by ∣∣y∣∣T≡∣∣T−1(y)∣∣X.
- Then this is a norm on Y, and we have that ∣∣y∣∣Y≤∣∣T∣∣∣∣y∣∣T.
- This means that sets measured with T norm are larger than when measured in Y norm.
- This is because ∣∣T(T−1(y)∣∣Y≤∣∣T∣∣∣∣T−1(y)∣∣X by the defn of operator norm. Now see that the RHS equals ∣∣T∣∣∣∣yT∣∣ and we get the desired inequality.
- Thus, the identity map I:(Y,∣∣⋅∣∣T)→(Y,∣∣⋅∣∣Y) is bounded, since a set that is bounded in the ∣∣⋅∣∣T norm will be smaller in the ∣∣⋅∣∣Y norm, and will thus continue to be bouned.
- Moreover, since T is continuous, we can check that (Y,∣∣⋅∣∣T) is also a banach space, since a series will converge in ∣∣⋅∣∣T iff its preimage converges in X.
- By the above lemma, this means that the two norms ∣∣⋅∣∣Y and ∣∣⋅∣∣T are equivalent.
- So, we get the reverse inclusion, where the norm ∣∣y∣∣T≤K∣∣y∣∣Y.
- But that just means that ∣∣T−1(y)∣∣≤K∣∣y∣∣Y, or that the operator T−1 is bounded!
§ Open Mapping Theorem
- Let T:X→Y be a surjective bounded operator. Then we claim that it's an open map.
- Factorize the map into T′:X/ket(T)→Y be a bijection, and the projection π:X→X/ker(T)will be an open map.
- Let U⊆Y be some open set. Since π is an open map, we have that π(U) is open.
- The latter map is a